JAKARTA - Expert in Criminal Law on Money Laundering (TPPU), Yenti Garnasih, assessed that the alleged TPPU in the case that dragged the former Deputy Attorney General for Special Crimes (Jampidsus) of the Attorney General's Office, Febrie Adriansyah, had sufficient strong indications.
According to Yenti, one of the allegations can be seen from the findings of money and gold bars when officers conducted a search at Febrie's house. He assessed that the amount of property found needed to be further investigated because it was considered disproportionate to Febrie's capacity as a law enforcement officer.
"We see that the indications in that direction, especially TPPU, are very much. In his house there are a number of those (money and gold bars) that are not appropriate for him," Yenti told reporters in Jakarta, Wednesday, August 12.
Yenti also highlighted the possibility of corruption committed by law enforcement officers when carrying out anti-corruption duties. According to him, this practice can take the form of accepting bribes, gratification, to extortion.
"He has the possibility that they are corrupt because they fight corruption with corruption. They want to fight corruption but he accepts bribes or gratification or extortion," he said.
Furthermore, Yenti linked the problem to poor governance and the practice of corruption, collusion, and nepotism (KKN). He assessed that the problem of abuse of authority was one of the factors that had exacerbated the situation.
"Why is there so much corruption, this is related to nepotism, KKN, it means there is an executive problem that abuses authority or against the law to the detriment of state finances," he explained.
According to Yenti, this condition shows the fragility of the three pillars of state power, namely the executive, legislative, and judicial.
"This has further shown that the three pillars are all fragile. The executive, legislative and judicial branches are fragile, tend to be corrupt and money laundering," he added.
Yenti Straighten the Term of Criminalization In addition to highlighting the alleged TPPU, Yenti also criticized Febrie's statement who previously admitted to being criminalized. He assessed that the term needed to be straightened because legally what can be criminalized is an act, not a person.
"The term criminalization is also wrong. I as a campus person must straighten it out. If the term criminalization is a process. For example, we didn't have a money laundering law, suddenly we have money laundering, we are criminalizing the act of enjoying the results of the crime, now it's called TPPU," he explained.
Yenti explained that the designation of a person as a suspect cannot be immediately referred to as criminalization. According to him, criminalization is related to the process when an act that was not previously categorized as a crime is then determined as a criminal act through legal rules.
"What is criminalized is the act. Loh, there is no law, how can I be convicted, that's called criminalization," he said.
Therefore, Yenti considered that the more appropriate term to describe Febrie's statement was to feel that he was criminalized. In this context, Febrie allegedly felt that he should not have the status of a suspect or have no criminal indication, but was then designated as a suspect due to alleged abuse of power and pressure from certain parties.
"Maybe what he meant was that he was criminalized. That is, he said that I actually didn't have to be a suspect, I didn't have to be indicated initially, then I became a suspect. But I was forced because there was abuse of power or there was coercion from superiors at that level," he concluded.
The English, Chinese, Japanese, Arabic, and French versions are automatically generated by the AI. So there may still be inaccuracies in translating, please always see Indonesian as our main language. (system supported by DigitalSiber.id)
